It costs $40,000 per student per year to support the kind of urban boarding school the Common Council's "Public Safety Action Plan" cites to show the potential of such a facility in Milwaukee County, according to the Harvard study cited in the plan.

But the SEED schools analyzed in the Harvard study and the urban boarding school envisioned by the Milwaukee action plan's anonymous authors would be vastly different in almost every important respect. SEED schools select students through a lottery because there are just too many applications from families and children who want to attend; the Milwaukee school, in contrast, would in essence serve as a correctional facility, complete with boot camp, that judges would order delinquents to attend.

The two academics do say that SEED schools, which students attend for middle school and high school, improve test scores. They also make clear that long-term outcomes are unknown.

"Unfortunately, however, calculating the non-test score benefits of attending SEED is difficult and, at this stage in the life-cycle of their oldest cohorts, premature," they say. "Whether or not the total benefits of attending SEED outweigh the costs can be known with the passage of time."

To enroll in a SEED school, students must be entering sixth grade; presumably, that would not be the case in Milwaukee -- older students ordered to attend the school would not get the benefits of some of the foundational educational experiences SEED schools provide. SEED schools also can "counsel out" or expel students -- where would the Milwaukee boarding school send students who don't measure up?

The council's action plan says the county should build and operate the school. Here is the council's verbiage, per the action plan, under the recommendation, "Establish a local boarding school with boot camp-style and 'rite of passage' programs for at-risk youths."

A local boarding school would provide an intermediate level of “staff-secure” detention between facilities like the unlocked St. Charles shelter and locked detention at Lincoln Hills. Integrated boot camp-style programs could be incorporated to help youths learn discipline. Likewise, “rites of passage” programs, such as those provided through Milwaukee’s Be The Change initiative, would help youths transition to adulthood and attain the self-knowledge needed to achieve cultural, social and academic success.

Delinquent and non-delinquent populations apparently would mix at the Milwaukee school.

A public boarding school would also serve, when appropriate, to remove youths from chaotic homes and negative social influences to a secure, stable environment where they could catch up on their education. According to former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, public boarding schools may be of benefit when “we have some children where there’s not a mom, there’s not a dad, there’s not a grandma, there’s just nobody at home. There’s just certain kids we should have 24/7 to really create a safe environment and give them a chance to be successful.” Urban public boarding schools have demonstrated success, according to a 2012 study by a Harvard economist – children admitted to a public boarding school in Washington had significantly higher math and reading scores, and enrollment in the school was effective at increasing achievement among poor minority students, to the extent that attendance at the boarding school had the power to eliminate the local racial achievement gap in four years.

There are a host of unanswered questions -- who pays for the school? Will it, like the SEED schools, have both middle and high school components? Will students at the Milwaukee school have to start with the middle school component, or will they enroll in the high school, even if they are not academically ready? If they enroll later, how will that affect other students? Do school supporters anticipate that Milwaukee boarding school students, like SEED school students, will be "significantly less likely" to be special education students than at a regular public school? Will students be expected to stay in the school until graduation? If so, how will additional students be accommodated? Will additional $40,000-per-student-per-year schools be needed as the first school reaches enrollment capacity? Will non-delinquent students -- those from homes without parents -- be subject to the same boot camp curriculum as offenders might face?

The Common Council's Public Safety Action Plan should address these questions. It doesn't. Common Council President Ashanti Hamilton has promised two listening session on the plan. Perhaps he, plan champion Ald. Robert Donovan, and whoever else was involved in developing this plan will provide some answers.

Memberships: Marathon County Bar Association, 1988-present The State Bar of Wisconsin, 1988-present Civil Trail Counsel of Wisconsin, 1988-present State Bar of Wisconsin Fee Arbitration Panel (District 5 chairman) State Bar of Wisconsin Local Bar Relations Committee (2007-2010) Vice president, Marathon County Bar Association (2005-2006) President, Marathon County Bar Association (2006-07)Legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, administrative proceedings: Extensive civil litigation experience in many venues since 1988. General civil insurance defense work, for the most part, but also business and real estate litigation. Also litigated some criminal law cases from 1997 to 2010

Number of cases tried to verdict or judgment: Since 1988 I have had jury trials in many venues including; Chippewa, Menominee, Sawyer, Wood, Portage, Marathon, Vilas, Price, Brown and Outagamie counties. I have had many more court trials in some of the same or other counties including; Lincoln, Langlade, Oneida and Clark counties.

Number of cases litigated on appeal: Involved in at least 30 since 1994

​"As a Wisconsin Concealed Carry License holder since 2012, I feel I understand the great responsibilities of gun ownership and the rights afforded by the Second Amendment." -- Gregory J. Strasser

​Professional or civic organizations, volunteer activities, service in a church or synagogue, or any other activities or hobbies that could be relevant or helpful to consideration of the application:

Why I Want to Be a Judge - I was raised in Wausau, graduating from Wausau West High School in 1981. I immediately returned to Wausau, after graduating from law school in 1988, to start my legal career and raise my family. My partner and I started our own firm in 1997. We established a scholarship program to support local student athletes. Our firm supports community volunteer efforts in many ways. In addition to my individual community involvement and service, I take great pride in my legal reputation and believe I have significant support from bench and bar for my appointment to a judgeship. I believe I am qualified for the position and it would be an honor to be able to serve my community, as a judge.

Judicial philosophy - Judges call balls and strikes. They don’t bend the rules, or make up new ones, to justify a desired result. Judges also have to have the temperament necessary to deal with difficult situations, emotional litigants and frustrating attorneys. The public wants to know that the judicial branch of our government is strong, fair and impartial. This is what a good judge embodies. A good judge never forgets that the people who come before him are entitled to justice but may also require a moment of direction, compassion or attention from the court. Such a moment can make a great difference. Lastly, a circuit court judge is the most visible representation society has, when is comes to the judicial branch of government. A judge must never forget the responsibility that comes with the position.

Best Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – District of Columbia v. Heller

In this 2008 case, the court held that the ban on registering handguns and a requirement to keep guns in the home disassembled or nonfunctional with a trigger lock violated the Second Amendment. The Court held that the first clause of the Second Amendment that references a “militia” is a prefatory clause that does not limit the operative clause of the Amendment. The case is important because it, in my mind, the most pervasive attack on the Second Amendment, to that point, was the “militia requirement” argument. In this respect, the court’s focus was correctly placed, not on the prefatory clause “A well regulated Militia…” as an announcement of purpose, but on the operative clause “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” in affirming the individual right to keep and bear arms. As a Wisconsin Concealed Carry License holder since 2012, I feel I understand the great responsibilities of gun ownership and the rights afforded by the Second Amendment. The Heller case makes clear the viability and power of the Second Amendment. It is up to me to live up to the responsibilities I assume in exercising those rights.

Worst Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – King v. Burwell

In this 2015 case, the court addressed the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The court essentially validated the authority of the ACA by upholding the tax credits provided in the ACA. As such, it was proper for the Internal Revenue Service to create a regulation that extended the tax credits the Affordable Care Act authorized to federal exchanges as well as those created by the states. I was struck by how the ruling of the case seemed to ignore he plain language of the statute limiting the tax credits to state-created exchanges. This is an example, in my mind, of the danger of applying a more expansive reading of the language presented, in a way that, essentially, re-writes the language to make it fit the conclusion.

*(According to Wikipedia, "For its 2014 rankings, U.S. News & World Report's 'Best Law Schools' placed Hamline's overall law school program in a six-way tie at #126 among the 144 law schools it ranked."

Adding 280 police officers to the city's payroll, as called for in a public safety plan, would cost $31.7 million per year by the fifth year of the surge, according to city budget figures.

That amount dwarfs $23.6 million budget for the entire Milwaukee Public Library system.

Adding 280 new cops would cost $31.7 million per year.

The additional cops would cost $29 million in the first year, then increase as officers receive annual step increases, city Budget and Management Director Mark Nicolini said in an email.

The costs include initial equipment costs of $7,285 per officer and a new $57,000 squad car for every five additional officers.

And while Common Council's Public Safety Action Plan says adding the 280 officers would restore police staffing to 2008 levels, figures from the city's budget office indicates that the increase would boost staffing levels well past those seen in 2008. That year, there was an average of 1,994 sworn officers. This year, there is an average of 1,888 sworn officers, or 106 fewer than in 2008, Nicolini said.

Adding 106 officers to the Police Department would cost $11 million the first year, increasing to $13 million in year five, according to the budget office figures.

Attorney General Brad Schimel, heading up the investigation into the fatal shooting of Sylville Smith, has received $2,500 from the Milwaukee police union's political action committee since 2014.

Schimel promised a transparent investigation, but thus far has failed to deliver, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

"To date you have promised transparency, but provided little information on your investigation to the community and Mr. Smith’s grieving family and friends, who seek understanding of the deadly incident that transpired on August 13," the civil rights organization said in a letter to Schimel.

Smith's shooting led to unrest and arson around the Sherman Park neighborhood.

Schimel announced Monday that events related to Smith's shooting were captured by two police body cameras, not just one. He declined to release the videos.

Schimel has receive five different $500 donations from the Milwaukee Police Association's PAC, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

A federal magistrate judge this month ordered Dassey either freed or retried because the State Court of Appeals made an "unreasonable determination of fact" when it said investigators made no promises to the intellectually challenged Dassey when they questioned him. Dassey, then 16, did not have a lawyer or adult with him during questioning.

Dassey, along with his uncle, Steven Avery, were convicted in the 2005 slaying of Teresa Halbach, a photographer. Interest in the murder and the questionable justice that followed was revived when Netflix aired "Making a Murderer" in December.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William E. Duffin explained at length in his decision how the three judges -- who issued a perfunctory, unsigned opinion -- messed up.

Some excerpts:

The primary error in the court of appeals’ terse decision was its focus on facts in isolation and its failure to assess voluntariness under the totality of circumstances. Although the court of appeals correctly noted the totality of the circumstances standard...its decision does not reflect its application. For example, omitted from its discussion is any consideration of how the absence of a parent or allied adult affected the voluntariness of Dassey’s confession. Nor does the court of appeals’ decision reflect any consideration of how the investigators overcame Dassey’s resistance by deliberately exploiting the absence of his mother, feigning paternalistic concern for his best interests and by statements such as, “Your mom said you’d be honest with us.”....Most significantly, however, the court of appeals erred when it focused on the statements of the investigators in isolation to conclude that they did not make any promises of leniency.

...“the truth” to the investigators was often merely whichever of Dassey’s version of events they eventually accepted. Thus, as long as Dassey told a version the investigators accepted as “the truth,” he was led to believe he had no fear of negative consequences. But if the investigators did not accept as true the story Dassey told them, he was told there would be repercussions. Especially when the investigators’ promises, assurances, and threats of negative consequences are assessed in conjunction with Dassey’s age, intellectual deficits, lack of experience in dealing with the police, the absence of a parent, and other relevant personal characteristics, the free will of a reasonable person in Dassey’s position would have been overborne....Consequently, the court finds that the confession Dassey gave to the police on March 1, 2006 was so clearly involuntary in a constitutional sense that the court of appeals’ decision to the contrary was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. ​

Unsuccessful district attorney candidate Verona Swanigan lost every ward in every Milwaukee County suburb, won just one Milwaukee ward south of I-94, and swept to victory through much of the city’s central city, according to county election results.

The south side ward Swanigan won, ward 254, boasted a total of seven voters. She won five, and District Attorney John Chisholm, who won re-election to his third term, won two.

Swanigan averaged 60% of the vote in the 116 city wards she won; Chisholm received an average of 69% of the vote in the 204 city wards he won.

Chisholm's biggest margin of victory came in Shorewood, where he won 87% of the vote; Swanigan came closest in Milwaukee, Brown Deer and West Milwaukee. She won about 40% of the vote in each of those communities.

Chisholm

Swanigan’s election strategy depended on a coalition of black voters and the machinations of dark hat political operative Craig Peterson, who is a money-funneler for Eric O’Keefe and the right-wing Club for Growth.

​It didn’t work. Chisholm had a strong record, and the liberal Greater Wisconsin Committee came to his aid. Swanigan, on the other hand, had significant liabilities, including a paucity of experience, questionable ability, a history of mental and physical health issues, and a bankruptcy. One woman, Shalonda Ezell, even offered voters gift cards to cast their ballots for Swanigan.

​Overall, Chisholm won in a landslide, 65% to 35%.

The map below shows voting results, some of which follow reflect the city's traditional geographic racial divisions. The green areas represent Chisholm wins; light areas are Swanigan wins; and the blue areas are where the two candidates tied. The data source is unofficial Milwaukee County election returns.

Why I Want to Be a Judge -I want to be judge to serve the community in which I was born and raised. I feel my life has been blessed....

I am not trying to escape any unpleasant situation. I have great law partners who I get along with. I know it would be difficult in some ways for me to leave my firm.

Yet, I feel my experience and temperament would enable me to be a good judge. I feel it is time for me to give back for the many blessings that have been bestowed on me.

Judicial philosophy - I believe a judge should first and foremost follow the law as written by the legislature. It is not a circuit court judge’s job, in my opinion, to create new law or to change the law as written. I believe, therefore, in a strict separation of legislative and judicial powers. If the law is ambiguous, a judge should make every effort to determine, to the extent possible, the intent of the legislature and apply the law consistent with that intent.

In matters involving case law, the doctrine of stare decisis demands that a judge follow precedent at all times. When case law is ambiguous, a judge should use those principles which are most consistent with established precedent to resolve the dispute.

Best Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – United States v. Lopez

The U. S. Supreme Court held in this decision that the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990 was unconstitutional on the grounds that Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause did not extend to regulating the possession of firearms in public schools.

The Court essentially held that the statute’s affect on interstate commerce was too attenuated for the statute to be valid. “To uphold the Government’s contentions here,” wrote Justice Rehnquist, “we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would…convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States.” Rehnquist admitted that the court’s prior decisions could be taken as long steps down that road, but he noted that Court declined to proceed further.

This is a good decision for the simple reason that it stopped a trend of the Supreme Court to continually expand congressional power through the Commerce Clause. While the court did not overrule any of its previous decisions interpreting the Commerce Clause, it did finally take a stand in this case and set some outer boundaries of Congress’s power.

Worst Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – Obergefall v. Hodges

The U. S. Supreme Court held in this decision that the fundamental right to marry extends to same-sex couples....the decision is a bad one for at least three reasons.

First, it creates a new right not included in the constitution. The framers of the 14th Amendment did not intend same-sex marriage to be safeguarded in the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses. Same-sex marriage was unheard of then and is not rooted in the nation’s history or traditions.

Second, it redefines marriage when this is a question that should be left to the states. I express no opinion about what marriage is or what it should be. I do express an opinion about who should decide these questions. “Understand well what this dissent is about,” states Justice John Roberts in his dissent. “It is not about whether, in my judgment, the institution of marriage should be changed to include same-sex couples. It is instead about whether, in our democratic republic, that decision should rest with the people acting through their elected representatives, or with five lawyers who happen to hold commissions authorizing them to resolve legal disputes according to law.” The Supreme Court’s job is not to give its approval to popular notions of social policy and fairness; it is rather to decide legal disputes within its constitutional limitations. The majority bases its decision on weak legal precedent. It seems to have wanted to do what is politically correct rather than what is legally correct.

Finally, the decision raises troublesome 1st Amendment questions involving freedom of religion. It appears inevitable that certain people who exercise their explicitly-granted religious freedom will come into conflict with those who exercise the newly-created right established in this decision.

*The purposes of the St. Thomas More Society, according to its website, are, in part: To inculcate in the Society and in the public generally a deeper understanding of their dependence upon Almighty God as the source of all human rights; to promote the study and application of theology, philosophy and jurisprudence to the end that the system of law may better apply eternal truths to the solution of everyday legal problems; and to sponsor the annual Lawyers' Red Mass and other Masses throughout the year and otherwise to invoke God's blessing upon the legal profession and persons in government.

"Walker's judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Walker's appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications.

Feltes

Name: Charles V. FeltesAppointed to: Trempealeau County Circuit Court

Appointment date: July 11, 2016​Education:Law School – University of Illinois College of Law, class of 1973 Undergrad – Wisconsin State University – River FallsHigh School – West Chicago Community High School

Legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, administrative proceedings:Court-appointed criminal work for the indigent - "The Judge at the time liked to refer the sexual offenders to me. (I have no explanation for this)" - personal injury, real estate litigation, workers comp litigation representing employees, traffic and ordinance litigation for municipalities.

Cases tried:20+ jury trials verdict, prosecuted hundreds of traffic and municipal violations in bench trials.I have probably handled 300-400 civil cases to verdict. This does not include small claims cases.

Professional or civic organizations, volunteer activities, service in a church or synagogue, or any other activities or hobbies that could be relevant or helpful to consideration of the application.1. Osseo Area Economic Development Corporation (Director since its inception in 1988 and Secretary since 1995).2. Osseo Community Foundation, Inc. (Director and Secretary since its inception since 2004).3. Osseo Commercial Club (Member from 1976 to 1995, President in about 1990).4. Knights of Columbus (Member since 1996).5. St. Raymond’s Parish Building Committee (2001-2003).6. St. Raymond’s Parish Council (2012 to 2015).7. The Federalist Society (2015 to date).8. Trempealeau County Interdisciplinary Team (2016).9. St. Raymond’s Parish Cemetery Committee (2016). Quotes:Other businesses or professions -In 1990’s my wife, children and I operated the roasted sweet corn concession at Sonny Acres’ “Fall Festival”. The business was called “We’re All Ears”.Why he wants to be a judge -For the most part, the people who appear in Court are good people who have found themselves in a bad situation or who have made bad decisions.

A judge often needs to do more than just apply the law to the facts as he or she may find them. There is often a human element which needs to be addressed.In order to make our society and economy work, people need to respect the law, law enforcement, the court system and its judges. Judges need to respect those who appear before them. Not everyone will win in court, but everyone is entitled to leave court feeling that they have been treated fairly.

I want to be a judge because I believe I could be very good at it. It’s that simple.Best Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – Citizens United v FEC

Should individuals who possess the right to free speech be deprived of this right when they form a group, an association or even a corporation? The U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v FEC…answered the foregoing question “No!”. The Court further ruled that to the extent it may have in prior decisions allowed the First Amendment rights of corporations to be regulated, it was wrong and those contrary decisions were overruled. In Citizens United, the Court rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not “natural persons”. Political speech is protected speech under the First Amendment, regardless of its source or content….The trend in our society is to suppress and control free speech. Certain terms cannot be used by our government officials. Certain non profits cannot get IRS certification. Universities and colleges have speech codes. Language which some people may find offensive or disturbing becomes hate speech or marginalized as “controversial”.The criminalization and regulation of free speech is something to be avoided and condemned. The Supreme Court in Citizens United got it right.Worst Wisconsin or US Supreme Court decision – Kelo v. City of New LondonThe case demonstrates that, on occasion, judges can’t read….In a 5-4 decision authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, the majority in that case rewrote the Fifth Amendment to read “ . . nor shall private property be taken for a public purpose without just compensation”. In Kelo the State of Connecticut organized a private non-profit development corporation to assist the City of New London in its economic development. This corporation’s development project was to be anchored by a research facility of pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, Inc. (Maker of Viagra and other wonderful drugs). The development would include water front development, hotel, restaurants and shops.The Supreme Court eventually upheld the use of eminent domain to take property for the development.This case was one of the worst U.S. Supreme Court cases decided. Not only was the language of theConstitution ignored, the majority opinion rewrote the Fifth Amendment substituting the term “public purpose” for “public use”. It justified the use of eminent domain take property from one private party so it can be used by another private party for private gain. The “public purpose” of increased tax base and jobs should never be the sole justification for a taking under the Fifth Amendment. This logic would justify any governmental taking of private property for any reason so long as the tax base was benefitted.The tragic end to this case is what happened after this “landmark” decision. Pfizer, Inc. pulled out of the project and left New London altogether. The development never occurred, the condemned land lies unused….

Racine County Circuit Judge Michael J. Piontek knows now the he should make sure his private research is accurate before he uses it to sanctimoniously and publicly cudgel a defendant in open court.Piontek’s reliance on his own shoddy research when sentencing defendant Patricia A. Enriquez means she is entitled to be resentenced, a Court of Appeals panel ruled.

By a different judge.​The District 2 appeals panel noted in a footnote that the judicial conduct code says “ ‘[a] judge may not initiate, permit, engage in or consider ex parte communications concerning a pending or impending action or proceeding’ except under certain circumstances that do not apply here.”​Piontek was relying on the unverified information when he called Enriquez “probably the biggest liar” that had ever come before him, and then refused to let her respond, according to the opinion.“I don’t want any comment from you anymore,” he said.

Enriquez surely had her problems. She was a nurse who provided non-narcotic drugs to a police informant and, as a result, pleaded guilty to two counts of delivering controlled substances.

Piontek

But Enriquez also had an 18-year nursing career, a master’s degree, had served four years in the Army Reserve, and had no prior criminal convictions. She suffered from diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and had endured two neck fractures, one as a girl and one more recently, wrote Appeals Judge Lisa S. Neubauer for the panel.

“I know that I used poor judgment,” Enriquez told Piontek during her sentencing hearing. “And I no longer will be in nursing. I am retiring. And for this I am very regretful and very remorseful.”

Piontek then presented the results of his internet detective work, which he claimed “showed that Enriquez’s license to practice nursing in Texas had been revoked in 2000 because she had misappropriated morphine from the hospital where she had worked and that she had never possessed a license in Illinois,” Neubauer wrote.

Piontek lit into Enriquez, according to the July Appeals Court decision.

“You know, you’re taking morphine, either not giving it to the patients, administrating it to yourself, selling it. I don’t know what exactly it is. But I do know that it’s true that your license was revoked because you took Morphine that was destined for patients or destined for discarding. And you used it or sold it or a combination of both.”

“If you’re going to lie to the Court and present patently false information to me in order for me to fashion a sentence, and I was born but it wasn’t yesterday, and I find out about it, there is a—there is a consequence to that…. …. Your character is, I would classify as miserable concerning honesty…. The aggravating circumstances are your dishonesty to the Court, to the Court’s agencies including the author of the presentence report.

Except that Enriquez’s license wasn’t revoked in Texas and she was a licensed nurse in Illinois for 28 years. She submitted information from the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation verifying her licensure in that state and submitted documentation from the Texas Board of Nursing showing that she had voluntarily surrendered her nursing license. Also included was a document charging her with seventeen counts of violating Texas law, but she said there was nothing showing she sold morphine. (Enriquez claimed that she did not correctly document some morphine withdrawals, but the records also indicated she tested positive for the drug, according to the decision.)|

Piontek, relying in part on the inaccurate information he dug up on his own, hammered her with a sentence of five years behind bars and six years of extended supervision. The prosecution had sought a much lighter sentence -- 18 months in prison and 18 months extended supervision on one of the count and three years probation on the other count.​As Neubauer noted in her footnote, comments in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Rules “state that “[a] judge must not independently investigate facts in a case and must consider only the evidence presented. As our supreme court has said, “[a] judge must not go out and gather evidence in a pending case. To do so is error…. Indeed, one of the many problems with an independent investigation is the potential for error and, as was the case here, the inability of the parties to factually and legally address the judge’s information other than in an ad hoc manner, leading to further error.”

"There is a law pre-existing governments that does not depend on any man's volitional action or decision," Kelly wrote, channeling John Quincy Adams, in the 1991 inaugural issue of the Regent University Law Review. "This law has a determinate content, separating right from wrong, and defining justice, and most importantly...this law is binding upon man-it does not require his agreement or consent." (Emphasis added.)

Kelly, the founding editor of the the law review, was a little vague about what all was included in the "determinate content," citing only the most obvious crime.

"Both God and nature stand in witness that murder is wrong," he wrote.

But ordinary mortals can make some choices, Kelly argued.

"Neither Scripture nor nature, however, directly addresses whether import tariffs should be imposed, what the personal income tax rate ought to be, or how appeals should be prosecuted in the federal court system. In matters such as these, we are left to our discretion and mutual agreement," he wrote.

Regent University was formerly was known as Christian Broadcasting Network University, was founded by televangelist Pat Robertson, and was considered a mediocrity under both names.

The overarching mission of the Regent University Law Review is the same as that of Regent University, that is, to bring glory to God and to His Son, Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit...

We believe that God's law has something to say about every area of law. To the inevitable objection that the law of nature and nature's God could not possibly have anticipated such topics as corporate taxation, antitrust suits, or the constitutional incorporation doctrine, I answer:Every legal question must rest on some foundational premise, and that premise must stand the test of measurement against the law of nature and nature's God. Jesus illustrated the importance of foundations with relation to our faith...

Daniel Kelly

Kelly wrote about the unchanging nature of scientific laws and compared it the laws of society. He cited that great thinker, Calvin Coolidge who observed that "[m]en do not make laws. They do but discover them. Laws must be justified by something more than the will of the majority. They must rest on the eternal foundation of righteousness."

In another section of his essay, Kelly wrote,

The law revealed in Scripture, with which the law of nature is in all points consistent, both having the same Author, is our ultimate recourse for truth....​We are, and must be, subject to the principles contained in Scripture. Just as we do not choose to submit to the general theory of relativity, so is consent unnecessary with regard to the general principles of Scripture, though when considered carefully, reason will show that it is only logical that we are subject to them. ​And he concludes by quoting James 1:22:

Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in the mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it-he will be blessed in what he does.